Making reductive wines

Cellar Rats (ITB)
1

For the winemakers:

For those of you who intentionally bottle your wines a bit reductive, do you do anything to give consumers a heads up that they need to wait?

2

Q. Why would you intentionally make a reductive wine?

3

Amen.

4

This should get some interesting responses but I believe a lot of traditionally great wines are made in a reductive environment. I also seem to remember that the issue is a bit divisive among wine makers.

5

because they’re freakin’ delicious [berserker.gif]

6

Beats the alternative, which is bottling in an oxidative state. I believe that those who are propenents believe that bottling reduced increases the longevity of the wine.

I know a couple of OR pinot producers who purposely bottle their wines in a reduced state - Cameron and J. Christopher. Just takes a little air to open 'em up.

7

I think we need to be careful with the word “reductive.”
As Bob says, oxidative is the opposite of reductive but those terms are not referencing smells or flavors.
The redox potential of any wine is measured in millivolts and indicates the levels of dissolved oxygen in solution. Typically, an aerated red wine has a redox potential of 400-450 mV, whereas, storage of the same wine in the absence of air for some time will reduce this to 200-250mV. Most winemakers try to keep redox potential low when making and bottling. (Exceptions like vin jaune, etc.)
However, the real danger is that hydrogen sulfide, which can be formed during fermentation (most often when the yeasts are not properly nourished), reacts to form reduced sulpher compounds - these are what people usually are talking about when they say a wine is reduced - they smell like burnt match, garlic, onion, leek, rotten egg, rubber, etc. These sulpher compounds can still exist in oxidative conditions which is why aerating a wine that smells like this usually doesn’t work and may actually oxidize the wine.
So, the presence of sulpher compounds is what most folks mean when they say reduced but bottling a wine in a reduced atmosphere does not necessarily mean a wine that smells “reductive.”
Moreover, sulpher compounds can turn into mercaptans which are very hard to remove from wine. Copper sulfate is one way to get rid of sulpher compounds (at some cost, possibly temporary, to the smell and flavor of the wine) but once they become mercatans the process becomes a series of chemical adds that may or may not be effective at removing the mercatans and will definetly effect the smell and flavor of the wine long-term.
My point here is that reductive is used loosely among tasters and has an entirely different meaning in wine chemistry. As long as we’re all on the same page, then nothing gets misunderstood.
Best, Jim

8

I think we need to be careful with the word “reductive.”
As Bob says, oxidative is the opposite of reductive but those terms are not referencing smells or flavors.
The redox potential of any wine is measured in millivolts and indicates the levels of dissolved oxygen in solution. Typically, an aerated red wine has a redox potential of 400-450 mV, whereas, storage of the same wine in the absence of air for some time will reduce this to 200-250mV. Most winemakers try to keep redox potential low when making and bottling. (Exceptions like vin jaune, etc.)
However, the real danger is that hydrogen sulfide, which can be formed during fermentation (most often when the yeasts are not properly nourished), reacts to form reduced sulpher compounds - these are what people usually are talking about when they say a wine is reduced - they smell like burnt match, garlic, onion, leek, rotten egg, rubber, etc. These sulpher compounds can still exist in oxidative conditions which is why aerating a wine that smells like this usually doesn’t work and may actually oxidize the wine.
So, the presence of sulpher compounds is what most folks mean when they say reduced but bottling a wine in a reduced atmosphere does not necessarily mean a wine that smells “reductive.”
Moreover, sulpher compounds can turn into mercaptans which are very hard to remove from wine. Copper sulfate is one way to get rid of sulpher compounds (at some cost, possibly temporary, to the smell and flavor of the wine) but once they become mercatans the process becomes a series of chemical adds that may or may not be effective at removing the mercatans and will definetly effect the smell and flavor of the wine long-term.
My point here is that reductive is used loosely among tasters and has an entirely different meaning in wine chemistry. As long as we’re all on the same page, then nothing gets misunderstood.
Best, Jim

Thanks for your explanation, Jim.

9

Thanks for that, Jim.

I just came back from judging at a competition where I found myself having to explain to judges this ‘reduction thing’ just as you have explained it, or reasonably close.

10

Thanks for the info Jim. So do you cringe when people say a wine is reduced … or reductive … or smells reduced etc. Or is it a reasonable descriptor.

And also, why didn’t this thread get some more action from other wine-makers?

BUMP.

Jason

11

Jason,
Let’s face it; very few adjectives used to describe wine are done so with precision. One man’s strawberry is another’s face powder, etc.
But understanding what reduction is as opposed to how the term is used, makes it easy to translate.
Best, Jim

12

Reinhold Haart and J.J. Prum make spectacular wines in the “reductive” style. Both their wines have “funky” aromas that don’t go away with air, sometimes increase with aeration actually, but I find they always go away with bottle age. J.J. Prum takes a looong time for the aromas to go away but when they do the payoff is extraordinary. A 1971 WS Auslese was just perfect with not a trace of “reductive” aromas. A Haart 1989 Piesporter Goldtropfchen Spatlese at the estate was beautiful in August 2008 with no hint of reductive aromas. The 2007 PG Auslese earlier in the tasting showed some of those aromas but as evidenced later in the tasting with the '89 they will go away.

Schafer-Frohlich also makes wine in this style. All three of these producers also use natural yeasts with spontaneous fermentation which also, IIRC, gives way to “funky” aromas too.

13

Lyle,
I do not pretend to know, but I thought that Prum (and possibly others) funkiness close to release had to do with sulphite additions prior to bottling and not either reduced sulpher compounds or any particular non-oxidative regimen.
Thoughts?
Best, Jim

14

From what I understand it is a combo of native yeasts and sulphur added at bottling along with completely reductive winemaking. I have had bottles that have minimal sulfur added, like from Schaefer-Frohlich and they have that same “funk” aroma. But he does native yeast spontaneous fermentation and that can too produce off aromas during a wines youth. He also does reductive winemaking. So not sure but like white burgundy premox I bet its not so simple and a combination of things.

15

While you can have a “funky” ferment with off aromas when going with native ferments, you can just as readily do so with purchased yeast, I don’t think that there is any causality there that you can assume.

16

Some winemakers do intentionally try for a wine that is slightly reduced (using Jim C’s definition of the word, meaning a wine that shows some reduction on the nose and/or palate). I’ve seen it most often in Burgundy, for both red and white wine production. They even have a name for it there… “noble reduction”.
A lot of the complexities we associate with certain types of wines (again, as a for instance, Burgundies) are sulfur-based. Nudging the wine towards a slightly reduced state may help promote more of this complexity. Kind of walking a tightrope from a New World perspective.

17

Well, yes and no. If H2S is a problem you can certainly purchase yeasts that are selected because they tend to produce lower levels. Plus, I would say that winemakers that use native yeasts also tend to not add any nitrogen source before/during fermentation and this can also lead to a higher level of sulfides.

Andy

18

My comment was in reference to what Lyle wrote. There is no causality between a native ferment and bottling a stinky wine. You can make a oxidized or reduced wine, a clean or spoiled wine, a long lived or short lived wine or any other kind of wine via either method just as readily.

19

Understood but I would argue that native ferments are more prone to stinky ferments because the yeast have not been selected for low H2S production or low nitrogen requirements, plus they are more likely done with no additional nitrogen source added to the must.

Andy

20

Andy, I think you might be putting too much stock in the commercial yeast producer’s claims about lower H2S production. Yes, they select some strains based on production, but I’d argue that initial must chemistry is far more important. You alluded to this in your earlier post about nitrogen requirements. I think there’s a fallacious sentiment that native ferments produce more H2S and require more nitrogen/nutrients than commercial strains, but in my experience, that just isn’t true. It has much more to do with how ripe your grapes are versus your initial chemistry. We do all of our ferments with native yeast and don’t add nutrients, and over the the last 3 years we’ve done nearly 300 ferments with only a handful that showed any reduction. At previous wineries I had just as much, if not more reduction using commercial yeast and adding nutrients. I pick earlier now than I ever have and have much lower starting YANs, and very rarely have fermentation issues. Bottom line - it’s hard to make any claims about fermentation kinetics of native vs commercial yeasts without examining the other variables involved.